Skip to main content

It's time to chronicle the life of a gun owner:  me.  First, a little background on my status.  I'm probably a gun nut since I own a pair of shotguns, a couple handguns, and a few hunting rifles.  Some of them are even (gasp) semi-automatic.  Oh, the humanity.  Oops, I almost forgot the crossbow.  Those of you who are prone to fainting spells can relax--I also own a big, hernia-inducing gun safe, which I use to protect my corner of the planet from risk.  Dive below the squiggedy thing for more scary gun stories...

How did I end up with such a vast armory?  To put it bluntly, people died.  Gun-owning relatives passed away from old age and I ended up as the somewhat reluctant heir to an odd collection of heirlooms.  Not that I mind terribly, after all I'm one of the few shooters in the army of siblings, cousins, second cousins, third cousins, and "dang, she's cute--too bad this is a reunion" people who compose my generation.  It was sort of natural that hand-me-down firearms would come my way.

Since the aforementioned relatives:
    1. Owned guns
    2. Died
I suppose we could infer some nefarious link between their firearms ownership and their deaths, but we'd have to make the same link between underwear and death or toothbrushes and death (assuming my relatives brush and wear undies).

A more important question would be, "How has Dave survived 17,677 days around guns without anyone he knows getting shot?"  I suppose the big, hernia-inducing gun safe has a little to do with it but I haven't always had a gun safe.  But I do have a Dad, and he began teaching respect for firearms starting when I was maybe 5 years old.  I also had a collection of disreputable uncles who taught me hunting safety.  The long apprenticeship instilled in me some valuable habits, including using the same long apprenticeship technique with my own children.

What's a gun owner do every day?  Just about everything but shoot.

Not exactly true:  my gun fetish led me to buy a Wagner Power Painter soze I could shoot paint at railings.  This summer I've spent a lot of time with the Power Painter in full auto mode while I sprayed down hordes of Commie Fence Pickets with lethal blasts of latex.  One gets kicks where one can, I suppose.

I also spent a lot of time wantonly slinging lead projectiles at wildlife.  For me, 4-ounce balls work best.  Less than that and the bait won't stay down; more than that and I can't feel the fish bite.  I know, I know:  I should be going non-toxic.

I killed quite a few weeds this year.  Again, it's the gun fetishy thing:  a gallon of broad spectrum weed killer has this handy applicator pistol with a pump charging mechanism.  Cock, spray, watch the dandelion die.  Pump, spray, watch the dandelion die.  Fun, but repetitive.  I need minions.

I did do some hunting this year.  Purr, my oh-so-spoiled housecat went missing and I used my predatory instincts to track him to the Humane Society shelter (Google makes hunting so much easier).  It was more of a photo safari; since we got the cat back my wife hasn't stopped taking his picture.

Wait a minute:  I did do some actual shooting with an actual firearm.  Yep, I put several dozen crossbow bolts into a hay bale.  Crossbows look all sinister & shit, but once you use one you quickly learn why they didn't survive the 17th century.  It's a hard to cock, short range, awkward weapon that is fun in a masochistic kind of way.  Bring the Salonpas patches for your lower back.

In between painting, weed killing, and cat chasing, I did manage a couple trips to the skeet range.  I have to work at skeet, but my teenage son is a natural.  I'd just as soon watch him shoot as do it myself (I wish he was as handy with the Power Painter).

That's the mundane life of a gun owner.  No swagger, no bravado, no getting confrontational with the neighbors just 'cuz I'm packing heat.  Better watch out though or I'll paint yer damn fence.

Originally posted to DaveinBremerton on Sat Aug 27, 2011 at 02:47 AM PDT.

Also republished by Right to Keep and Bear Arms.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Hop on the ferry. (13+ / 0-)

    I have a fence just begging for it.

    Sarcasm. Just one more service I provide.

    by Grannus on Sat Aug 27, 2011 at 03:06:29 AM PDT

  •  I enjoyed this. (12+ / 0-)

    I grew up around guns. My dad was on a pistol team who loaded and taught us to load our own ammo. My brother has one of those big gun safes. We all were taught to respect guns.

    The probem is that I don't trust that everyone has the same respect that you, I, my brother and a few gun-nut friends have.

    I don't want gun control so much as people control. If someone buys a gun in the society to which I and mine belong I want them to have to take a course or prove that they have with regular renewal requirements.

    Unapologetically pro-citizen. Not anti-corporation just very pro-citizen.

    by CanYouBeAngryAndStillDream on Sat Aug 27, 2011 at 03:19:13 AM PDT

  •  good one. (18+ / 0-)

    Earlier today I was out using a dangerous projectile (motor vehicle) and I just finished some quality time playing with poison (bleach, in the kitchen).  

    At present I'm a city mouse and don't own firearms.  My folks who are country mice do, and sometimes hunt for food.  Familiarity and respect for tools of any kind breed safe practices, and the converse is also true.  

  •  12531. (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    cevad, Grannus, soros, claude, DaveinBremerton

    ;-)

    "Another world is not only possible, she is on her way. On a quiet day, I can hear her breathing." Arundhati Roy

    by LaFeminista on Sat Aug 27, 2011 at 03:47:06 AM PDT

  •  There's always tomorrow nt (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    senilebiker, StevenJoseph
  •  There might be those... (12+ / 0-)

    ...who come along and say that you just haven't killed anyone yet.  Some anti-gun folks are really, really fond of that yet.

    Of course, it won't hold up well for my uncle who recently passed away and went 25,500+ days without killing anyone, and he owned significantly more guns than you do.

    Maybe... just maybe... this helps show guns don't cause crime.  

    "Holy crap a freaking pirate. That's awesome ... pirates are awesome."

    by theatre goon on Sat Aug 27, 2011 at 04:13:00 AM PDT

    •  Those people will scream... (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      debedb, theatre goon, oldpunk

      ..."I told you so!" if it turns out that sometime in, say, a hundred years one of those guns does end up killing somebody.  Not only will it be your uncle's fault for buying them a couple generations ago, but it'll be your fault as well for sharing DNA with him.

      "Faced with what is right, to leave it undone shows a lack of courage." - Confucius

      by IndieGuy on Sat Aug 27, 2011 at 09:31:00 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  fallacious diary (6+ / 0-)

    Way to take on that dangerous straw man intruder with your weapons, sir.

    No one ever said that every individual gun owner will be expected to commit a crime or have an accident with guns just by virtue of possessing them.

    But your odds of such an event are higher than mine.  

    And you could be robbed, and then all your legal firearms would be in the possession of criminals, being used to commit crimes.

    Or your mental health could take a turn for the worse.  Something between 10 and 40% of people (estimates vary) will go through depression at some point in their lives.

    This diary reminds me of the people who point to their grandfather smoking well into his 90s and who didn't get cancer as "proof" that cigarettes are safe or something.

    Anecdote != data.

    •  Remember, that (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      IndieGuy, debedb

      Mikeb bombards this place with anecdote after anecdote, ad nauseum.

      •  Breaking - 7/11 not robbed today (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Petya Rostov

        This is kind of stupid diary, because today being a weekend, probably 50 people will die in firearms violence.

        We can cross DaveinBremerton of the suspect list, but them 50 are still pretty much dead.

        "Lethality is the prime function of a firearm why pretend otherwise?" 2dimeshift!

        by senilebiker on Sat Aug 27, 2011 at 07:08:15 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  50 from firearms, 200 from automobiles. (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          IndieGuy, debedb, oldpunk

          Accepting your figures for guns, there were 37,677 motor vehicle deaths in 2008. Flat-line distribution (assuming no increase on weekends, a totally non-justified assumption) gives 206 deaths over any 2-day period.

          Ain't statistics fun?

          For something that is designed to be as safe as possible, cars sure do kill more people than privately owned guns do...

          •  Well since your number includes suicides (0+ / 0-)

            by car, the numbers would be around 150 vs 200 on a like for like basis.

            But the fact is probably 90% of the population use cars or buses etc on multiple occassins each day, where as most guns are fired at most once a month, so the fatality rate per usage is much much higher for firearms.

            Also, you cant go to the supermarket on a Glock.

            "Lethality is the prime function of a firearm why pretend otherwise?" 2dimeshift!

            by senilebiker on Sat Aug 27, 2011 at 09:53:23 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  No suicides, unintentional injuries only. (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              oldpunk

              Here'sa link to 2009 preliminary data. Look near the bottom of page 19, you'll find:

              Accidents (unintentional injuries)

              (Subhead) Motor vehicle accidents: 36,284

              And, for devices designed to be as safe as possible, they still manage to kill many, many more people than devices designed (to paraphrase some of the anti-gun posters here on Kos) for the sole purpose of killing humans.

              I don't give a damn what they were designed to do, or what other activities they allow, they are obviously deadly, and kill people on a regular basis.

              Where's the outrage?

              (Guns are fired at most once a month? Really? I'd love to see believable research to corroborate that...)

              •  On average, how often is a gun used (0+ / 0-)

                Gun nuts with twenty weapons might go to the range once a week and fire 2 or 3.

                Hunters will maybe go hunting once a week in season, and they usually have a lot more than just one rifle.

                Home defense, maybe one every six months at a range or never

                LEO's annual requalification

                Gangbangers = not too often ot up the river.

                Seriously how often on avaerage is a gun in the US fired?

                And that still kills 13000 people each year.

                Do you have a car? How many times to you use it each day or week?

                "Lethality is the prime function of a firearm why pretend otherwise?" 2dimeshift!

                by senilebiker on Sun Aug 28, 2011 at 10:17:34 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

        •  We could always make (2+ / 0-)

          murder and violent assault illegal, and then... wait, crap. Nevermind.

        •  Good, then the stupid comment fits right in (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          oldpunk

          "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win". Mohandas K. Ghandi

          by DaveinBremerton on Sat Aug 27, 2011 at 06:43:13 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  scratch the "you could be robbed" argument (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      IndieGuy

      The writer's guns are kept in a safe.

    •  ?? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Mildly Unsuccessful Lurker
      Way to take on that dangerous straw man intruder with your weapons, sir.

      From your perspective, a "straw man" argument is something I'd be presenting rather than defending against.  You'll learn that when you finish that undergrad political science class.

      But your odds of such an event are higher than mine.

      I am oh, so glad you brought up statistics because I do risk management for living.  Let's have us a discussion, shall we?

      My odds of having a gun accident may be higher than yours, but is the risk significant?  My risk of being attacked by a  black bear is higher than my risk of being hit by space debris, but the fact remains that neither event presents me with significant risk.

      As for the risk of a gun accident, I can mitigate that risk considerably by practicing safe gun handling and storage techniques.  The fact that I've been around guns my entire life without incident suggests that my mitigated risk is comparable to your risk.

      This diary reminds me of the people who point to their grandfather smoking well into his 90s and who didn't get cancer as "proof" that cigarettes are safe or something.

      Nice try, but fucking ridiculous comparison.  However, we can take my current risk and extrapolate across the millions of other gun owners who don't make the news because they don't injure or kill anyone, and we can see that firearms owership is, of itself, not inherently risky.  Incompetent gun ownership may be another matter.

      As for my risk of getting robbed, it's exactly the same as yours.

      "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win". Mohandas K. Ghandi

      by DaveinBremerton on Sat Aug 27, 2011 at 04:11:52 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Identify the hazards, (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Grannus

        assess the risk, implement controls (both preventative and mitigation), re-evaluate residual risk to determine if as low as reasonably practicable, if not add controls until it is.  There is lot's the scientician doesn't seem to understand.

        Life is risky, politics is war, government is force and liberty is very expensive.

        by oldpunk on Sun Aug 28, 2011 at 05:43:17 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Sorry I missed this before Dave. (0+ / 0-)

        Great arguments make me happy - good job!  :)

        Irrevocable commitment to any religion is not only intellectual suicide; it is positive unfaith because it closes the mind to any new vision of the world. - Alan Watts On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

        by ocular sinister on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 02:08:52 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Please get rid of your motor vehicle... (0+ / 0-)

      before something bad happens.

  •  Well done. (4+ / 0-)

    Perhaps if I came into a firearm or two via your path, I'd ease into ownership.  As it is, on the couple of occasions I've had the cash in my pocket and a gun in my sights, I've balked at transitioning from someone who definitely wouldn't shoot anything to one who could.

    You can't spell CRAZY without R-AZ.

    by rb608 on Sat Aug 27, 2011 at 04:51:24 AM PDT

    •  If not for inheritance, I'd own four firearms (3+ / 0-)

      They would be a big game rifle, a .22 for practice, a pistol, and a shotgun.

      Some of what I inherited I gave to other family members because I just didn't need or want 12+ firearms.

      Regardless of how you may ease into firearms ownership, I do not recommend owning a gun unless you take the time to become proficient and purchase appropriate storage.

      Shooting is fun, especially long-range rifle and aerial shotgunning.  However, any good day shooting is followed by a couple hours with some stinky solvents, cleaning out the barrels.  If you can't commit to the pain-in-the-ass aspects of gun ownership, don't do it at all.

      "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win". Mohandas K. Ghandi

      by DaveinBremerton on Sat Aug 27, 2011 at 04:44:18 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Gun owners a danger to yourself an others (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    senilebiker, StevenJoseph

    so say statistics. Do yourself a favor, get rid of your guns.

    •  Do society a favor, and get rid of your car. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      debedb, oldpunk

      It's far more likely to kill innocent bystanders.

      "Faced with what is right, to leave it undone shows a lack of courage." - Confucius

      by IndieGuy on Sat Aug 27, 2011 at 09:33:40 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  So say the statisics... (2+ / 0-)
      so say statistics. Do yourself a favor, get rid of your guns.

      The problem with the statistics is that they're stochastic:  they show that a certain number of mishaps are likely to occur in a given time frame, but that's about all they show.  Stochastic models are useless for all but the broadest kinds of decision making.

      If the statistics were considerably more granular, we could look at mishaps by region, education level, income level, type firearm owned, firearms experience level, type of storage / safety devices used, and a host of other categories.

      From that level of granularity we might begin making rational analyses.  We could do a Pareto sort on the data and reveal which weapons / regions / backgrounds contribute the most to the problem, and then we might be in a position to recommend preventive or corrective actions.

      Just as important, we could look at who isn't involved in shooting mishaps and study what they do that shifts the odds in their favor.  We'd be in a position to validate the effectiveness of firearms safety training, storage and locking methods, gun safety devices and gun ergonomics, social and health services, relationship counseling, suicide prevention efforts, and any number of other intervention methods that might have a positive impact on the problem--and might even improve public health in ways broader than firearms ownership.

      But that would require an intelligent focus on the problem rather than a knee-jerk focus on winning an ideological argument.

      Getting back to statistics:

      I'm also a statistic.  Essentially I've run the same experiment 17,678 times and I keep getting the same result.  This result suggests that I'm doing one or more fairly effective risk control measures.  Common sense suggests it isn't luck--especially since several million other gun owners replicate the same experiment every day.  Common sense also suggests it would be a good idea to figure out what we're doing that has us beating the odds.

      So say the statistics.

      "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win". Mohandas K. Ghandi

      by DaveinBremerton on Sat Aug 27, 2011 at 09:25:40 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Decisions being made on the outcome of (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        gerrilea

        observation...if only there were a word for that kind of outcome based documentation of reality.

        •  Hummm....I'm thinking....Experience.... (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Elmar

          nope, that's not it.  Experience is what you get when you don't get what you want.

          ???????

          Ahhhh, I know, it has to be WISDOM!

          Naw, that ain't it...wisdom is what you get when experience kicks you in the teeth.

          Let's break this down again:

          outcome based documentation of reality

          Okay, this was a trick question, wasn't it????

          Grrrrrrrrrrrrr.....

          Now my last thought is.......Utopia?

          I give up! I'm being too one-dimensional tonight...

          :)

          OH, this was a great reply to a great reply, BTW...

          Thanks...

          -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

          by gerrilea on Tue Aug 30, 2011 at 12:13:32 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  "empirical evidence" may be a good term here...n/t (0+ / 0-)
  •  Good diary. (6+ / 0-)

    Citizens can arm themselves.

    Subjects can't.

    The former have my respect.

    The latter, my contempt.

    grieving citizen of the murdered Republic, unrepentant rebel against the Empire.

    by khereva on Sat Aug 27, 2011 at 05:18:39 AM PDT

  •  So on the basis of one personal anecdote (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    StevenJoseph, coquiero, sporks

    we can forget the 13000 people who are murdered or accidentally killed by firearms each year.

    Yep = can't argue with that logic.

    "Lethality is the prime function of a firearm why pretend otherwise?" 2dimeshift!

    by senilebiker on Sat Aug 27, 2011 at 05:28:29 AM PDT

  •  Holy cow, me too! (5+ / 0-)

    I've had guns for 9,125 days and not shot anyone!

  •  I am glad you are a sane and safe gun owner (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    senilebiker

    ...many are not. I know a couple people that own guns that probably shouldn't. They are not very intelligent and are prone to irrational mood swings.

    I don't think regulating guns is much of an answer...although why any law abiding citizen needs a gun that can hold more than six rounds or fire a 50 caliber is beyond me.

    -7.5 -7.28, Democratic Socialism...It's not just for Europeans.

    by Blueslide on Sat Aug 27, 2011 at 06:32:05 AM PDT

    •  Responding to a reasonable comment: (3+ / 0-)

      Regarding a gun needing more than six rounds, revolvers generally are limited to a six-round (sometimes five) capacity.  Semi-automatics have magazines holding roughly twice that.  The actual capacities are pretty variable.  To address the "need" part:  Nobody needs a Cadillac Escalade, when a mini-van would do just fine.  Lots of 'em on the road, though.

      As for the .50 cal:  Most gun owners do not have anything that large.  .22 cal, .38 cal, 9mm, .40 cal, .45 cal are a lot more common - and a lot more useful.

      "Faced with what is right, to leave it undone shows a lack of courage." - Confucius

      by IndieGuy on Sat Aug 27, 2011 at 09:49:39 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Also to address the need part... (3+ / 0-)

      ...if you knew what sort of bad situation you might find yourself in, you wouldn't need a gun period--you could just avoid it.  That said, if all you've got is dry wall and furniture for cover and you're facing an intruder--maybe two or more--with 30 heavy rounds in the magazine, you might want to consider something with a bit more power and endurance than a six-shot .22.

      •  I used to read a lot of gun magazines when I was (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        oldpunk

        younger. I was also a hunter and I support hunting. The magazines typically said a shotgun was your best home defense gun. A high caliber weapon tends to go thru walls as you point out and your neighbors may suffer the consequences.

        The only reason I ever heard to value a high capacity weapon is because your opponent may have the same. So a legal firearm is the only real reason to have it.

        The horse is out of the barn on any meaningful gun control. But I think a reasoned approach to gun control is not a bad thing.

        -7.5 -7.28, Democratic Socialism...It's not just for Europeans.

        by Blueslide on Sat Aug 27, 2011 at 03:36:21 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  There's no canonical home defense weapon... (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          oldpunk

          ...the principle argument for the shotgun is for corner shooting and a modicum suppression.  Then again, how many forced entries by law enforcement have you heard of where shotguns tipped the spear after the breach?  You're trading low rate of fire, slower reload, and unwieldiness for a wider cone of damage.

          •  As long as you can accurately place a round in (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Cera

            the 10 ring the caliber of weapon you use for home defense comes down to personal preference.

            Life is risky, politics is war, government is force and liberty is very expensive.

            by oldpunk on Sun Aug 28, 2011 at 05:51:30 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  Which guns are acceptable is another discussion (2+ / 0-)

      Today I was prowling around Youtube watching Stevie Ray Vaughan videos when I found a video of an idiot with an .50 caliber, M-2 machine gun mounted on an armored personnel carrier.  The M-2 was full auto, and the idiot was making video of himself shooting up piles of watermelons with it.

      I could happily draw the 2nd Amendment line to exclude ownership of a fully functional M-2 machine gun.

      But not all .50 caliber weapons fall into the same "almost a cannon" class as the M-2, and I don't have a problem with .50 pistols and muzzleloaders.  The hunter in me balks at the thought of anyone using a .50 sniper rifle for elk.

      But these are just one shooter's opinions.

      "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win". Mohandas K. Ghandi

      by DaveinBremerton on Sat Aug 27, 2011 at 06:21:49 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  FPS Russia. (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        happy camper, Robobagpiper, gerrilea

        Guy isn't a fool.  What he does is totally legal and on his own property.  

        His youtube videos serve as more a marketing channel for his supplier than anything else.

        •  I figured (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Robobagpiper, gerrilea

          it must be that guy... I believe he has a Class 3 dealer's license. The vids are indeed advertising for his business.

          "A lie is not the other side of a story; it's just a lie."

          by happy camper on Mon Aug 29, 2011 at 07:11:38 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  He's foolish about image (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          KVoimakas, ocular sinister

          Any Constitutional amendment owes its existence to the continued benevolence of a supermajority.  Prohibition came to be (and was eventually repealed) due to popular opinion and some effective political wrangling.

          Enter the idiot who is mortgaging my gun rights in order to make a profit.  The image he projects is--among other things--disrespectful to women.  Never mind his general crassness or the impact it has on the non-shooting public.  He presents a buffoonish image that reflects badly on all shooters.

          I have about as much tolerance for him as I do for the few hunters who still insist on putting the deer carcass on top of the car for all to see.  That quit being cool in the 1950's.

          "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win". Mohandas K. Ghandi

          by DaveinBremerton on Wed Aug 31, 2011 at 07:08:09 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  This isn't true. An underwhelming minority (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Robobagpiper, gerrilea

      of gun owners are not safe.  Given the number of firearms, and the number of households that have them: any given life is at more risk from the stairs in a house than from a firearm.

    •  Almost every musket out there is (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Robobagpiper, gerrilea

      going to be .50 or larger caliber.

  •  My dad wore a gun on his side in public... (6+ / 0-)

    for 13,505 days, give or take. Never killed anyone with it, but pulled it on peeps a bunch of times.

    He was a cop for 37 years.

    He was pretty much a right winger, sadly of the ditto head variety.

    But there was one issue in this world upon which he occupied a space well to my left. That being gun control.

    Over those 37 years, he'd dealt with guns v. humans in any number of ways. Drunken family shoot-em-ups. Suicides. Accidents of the hunting and kid got hold of it variety. Armed robberies. Barroom brawls. And, of course, his very favorite. Burying his cop buddies who'd caught the business end of one while on duty.

    Unlike his liberal kid, yours truly, who'd allow for guns for hunting, collecting and such, he wouldn't if he made the laws.

    In spite of the fact he wore one around he hated them with a bloody passion.

    I'm sorry, but he'd have ripped the happy success story told in this diary to pieces with anecdotes that'd make your skin crawl.

    Me, I'd respectfully tell you you're both full of it. Anecdotes don't tell whole stories.

    Where I come down on all this is that I hate your guns but I'm glad you are apparently mature and stable enough to have them around without inflicting any damage with them.

    So, unlike my old man who knew as much about the danger they pose as all of us put together, I don't begrudge your owning them.

    But if the point of this diary was to demonstrate that your responsible behavior somehow mitigates the bigger problem you need to aim again.

    Peace.

    •  The bigger problem is that our current (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Robobagpiper, gerrilea

      laws are not enforced.

      Punishing the law-abiding for the action of criminals (who won't obey the new law anyway) makes no sense.

      And too bad about your father but I've seen it happen often.  Cops who are exposed to the negative sides of humanity for years develop an "us v them" attitude and always seek to hammer down on the "them" which is everyone they don't personally know.

  •  This diary if full of the swagger (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Petya Rostov, debedb

    you hear from righteous, rather than everyday gun owners.

    My son owns two guns from being a arson investigator.  He never wears them in public, never off the job.  He's never had to shoot one, except for practice and testing for work.

    In fact, he wouldn't even have one if he had been able to continue doing what he loved to do ... shooting water at fires.  Unfortunately, an work incident took care of that...

    I remember taking him on a fishing expedition to Drummond Island - where he caught his first fish at age 5 - and walking through the woods.  A couple of 3-wheelers came roaring down the path  ridden by these big tough-looking guys, crossbows on their backs and a tiny little rabbit hanging from the handlebars.  We still laugh about it today.

    As I mentioned in previous articles ... I have a bow.  I  like my bow, though I don't shoot as often as I used to ... though now that I think of it, what w/the open-carry law in MI, maybe I'll take it to Arts, Beats and Eats this year...

    Nah.  Sort of silly, just like carrying a gun around for no reason.

    http://cultureid.com

    by debk on Sat Aug 27, 2011 at 07:57:37 AM PDT

    •  Doesn't strike me that way at all. (4+ / 0-)

      It strikes me more as an invitation, to those who contemplate guns with fear, to see and learn how guns can fit into the lives of people who don't happen to be criminals or "nuts."

      When you're in a class of people whose rights are threatened by a well-intentioned group or groups who have no familiarity with your life and needs but instead seem to stereotype you and view you with condescension, a reasonable response is to try to communicate, to try to give those folks a view of who you are and what you do.

      If you favor stricter gun laws, wouldn't it be better to arrive at your personal point of view with a good sense of who gun owners are, rather than a narrow and stereotypical view?  Maybe in the end you would decide that the benefits you seek are worth the harm they would cause to real people.  It's the nature of policy to weigh the benefits to one group against those to another.  But isn't that better than disrespecting, and writing off, a whole swath of people?

      •  Great comment, level headed and well reasoned! (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        KVoimakas, gerrilea

        I always appreciate skillful message construction.

        Irrevocable commitment to any religion is not only intellectual suicide; it is positive unfaith because it closes the mind to any new vision of the world. - Alan Watts On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

        by ocular sinister on Thu Sep 01, 2011 at 03:39:33 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Umm, (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Petya Rostov
    Where I come down on all this is that I hate your guns but I'm glad you are apparently mature and stable enough to have them around without inflicting any damage with them.

    Saying that "I haven't killed anyone yet, so I must be good" just reeks of immaturity and insecurity.

    Dissolve Israel; stop distinguishing between jew and non-jew in Palestine.

    by high5 on Sat Aug 27, 2011 at 08:07:53 AM PDT

    •  Sorry, my comment here should have been (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      IndieGuy, oldpunk

      a reply to The Eyewitness Muse above.

      Dissolve Israel; stop distinguishing between jew and non-jew in Palestine.

      by high5 on Sat Aug 27, 2011 at 09:51:29 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Never said I was good (2+ / 0-)

      And your comment reeks of self-righteous bigotry.  Your need to put words into my mouth speaks volumes to your own insecurities.

      I presented an intentionally sarcastic view of one gun owner's life as a means of presenting a facet of the discussion that is neither NRA's crap nor the anti-gun faction's crap.

      "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win". Mohandas K. Ghandi

      by DaveinBremerton on Sat Aug 27, 2011 at 06:31:12 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  You have to work on your sarcasm then. (0+ / 0-)

        Nough said.

        Dissolve Israel; stop distinguishing between jew and non-jew in Palestine.

        by high5 on Sun Aug 28, 2011 at 03:38:46 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  +10 I thought you did a great job here...funny (0+ / 0-)

        witty and smart...Loved it...

        Thanks, it was refreshing reading this, we need to keep things in perspective....

        -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

        by gerrilea on Tue Aug 30, 2011 at 12:42:22 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  My God! (3+ / 0-)

    17,677 days? He's out of control!

  •  Very much enjoyed the story. (3+ / 0-)

    Anecdotes are never meant to win the debate by themselves. They are meant to 'put a human face' on the numbers and statistics, so we mere humans can get a better 'gut feeling' for the truth.

    I hope that senilebiker and others remember what they say about 'one story not proving the case' the next time Mike trots out one of his anecdotes for public attention. I'm always in favor of a good discussion. That includes anecdotes and stories to illustrate how we feel and why, followed up by statistics and facts to prove what we claim.

    Poetry may inspire me, but research will convince me.

    Less "WAAAAH!", more progress.

    by IndyGlenn on Sat Aug 27, 2011 at 11:36:23 AM PDT

    •  Thanks. (2+ / 0-)

      This anecdote was intended to generate thought.  I believe firearms mishaps represent a bona-fide public health concern, and I'd support rational control measures.

      However, I have yet to see discussion based on rational consideration of types of gun mishaps and their contribution to the whole, a preventive focus on the types of mishaps that contribute most to the overall mayhem, and targeted control measures designed to solve the meat of the problem in a way that imposes as little as possible on civil rights.

      The NRA is all-out for unrestricted 2nd Amendment rights, and the anti-gun crowd is all-out for the greatest degree of restriction that can be pushed through our political system.  Neither one of them are putting solving the problem ahead of winning the argument.

      "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win". Mohandas K. Ghandi

      by DaveinBremerton on Sat Aug 27, 2011 at 06:39:01 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  mishaps vs blockage of rights (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        KVoimakas

        Prevention laws nearly never ends up doing what is expected when they are written.  In the event of a child having access to a firearm and something horrible happeneing, for instance, is already covered by Child Endagerment laws - the same ones that hold the local care giver responsable if Little Johnny drinks bleach or pokes his sister with a screwdriver.

        Really, guns are a tool.  As pointed out in the entry above, properly stored or handled firearms pose zero threat to anyone.  Should there be laws in case someone does something stupid with a firearm?  I dont think so.  We have other laws that would come into effect that work just fine.  Misuse a nailgun and someone gets injured?  There's a law that covers that.

        When a parent decides - yes DECIDES - to improperly store a tool and a child gets injured because of that, they are liable for the damages.  IMplying that Guns are DEMONS and asking for additional protections from these Plagues on Humanity is rediculous and a total non-starter.

        Whether the NRA and their gun manufacturing consituants or the Brady Bunch are correct is a silly arguement.  Both are wrong but the stance of the NRA is less wrong Constitutionally.  If they took FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) out of their rhetoric, they would be much closer to right than they are now.  Gun Restriction (I refuse to use the term 'control') works just fine for autocrats, thankfully we're not living in that kind of society.

        When I was a child, I spoke and reasoned as a child. But when I grew up I put away childish things. - 1 Corinthians 13:11 Bowers v. DeVito "...there is no constitutional right to be protected by the state against being murdered." Member of the LGC

        by ErikO on Wed Sep 07, 2011 at 11:38:14 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site